There is so much focus on the phyiscal of Nick's neck which I understand, but where is the questioning of how Nick will respond psychologically when faced with the nasty types of hits that a Safety is required to deliver. I want Nick back, but I am afraid the Nick we do get back will not be the one we are used to even if he is given guarantees that he is no more at risk than any other football player.

I think after a few games, perhaps pre-season, and he feels fine the next morning ... he'll resume back to his old self. No question, it will take some time ... just how much time though?

Clearly Nick still has to make the team. This is even true of Aaron Rodgers. If ANY player goes out of the field and just flat out can't get it done, he will be replaced.

The topic at hand is, should Nick be forced to retire, even if he can still get it done? I say no. The doctor who did the surgery stands by his work, and has cleared Nick. To me, that says alot.

That's not the topic. But, I'll roll with it.

If Nick Collins' doctor says he's no more at risk NOW than he was prior to the injury, his family wants him to play and the Packers doctors clear him ... he should most definitely have the choice to play or not.

Nick returning to form has been the biggest question mark to me. When thinking about it, however, I think it's possible. It will take some time, but it's certainly possible. NFL players are used to that kind of stuff and with enough training and conditioning (both mental and physical), I think he'll be OK.

I've been thinking along these lines too. If the guy absolutely insists on playing, I'd rather it were with GB.

I guess the draft will be an excellent indicator of what the Packers are thinking. The have Jennings and Levine lying in the weeds and I think they are high on both. Maybe Nick should come back and go on the PUP list to get back into football shape.

I guess the draft will be an excellent indicator of what the Packers are thinking. The have Jennings and Levine lying in the weeds and I think they are high on both. Maybe Nick should come back and go on the PUP list to get back into football shape.

I believe it is a really poor draft for safeties.

As far as I'm concerned this looks like Ted Thompson gamesmanship. He just doesn't want other teams to know what he's gonna do.

Maybe Nick should come back and go on the PUP list to get back into football shape.

This is a good idea, but I think it would be better to get him some preseason action action. It's no secret he's been out of football for nearly a year by the time the first game comes around. I think more game action the better because physically he's probably fine, but mentally is going to be the biggest hurdle. And to hop that hurdle, it'll take more game time.

nerdmann said:

As far as I'm concerned this looks like Ted Thompson gamesmanship. He just doesn't want other teams to know what he's gonna do.

I feel much better about Nick's situation now.

I wouldn't put it past Ted Thompson. I am leaning towards the belief that the Packers (if all doctors clear Nick Collins) they will retain his services. Nick Collins agent stated they are still waiting for more doctors input ... I can't help think they pretty much know all they need to and the Packers want to use the uncertainty as leverage to scare other teams into trading up in front of the Packers to take a Safety ... even though the Packers might not be interested since Nick Collins is (hypothetically) coming back.

Wish I could make 100,000+ doing a surgery on someone with no symptoms that has a 'cr$%' prognosis(not really)

Not much is known about his symptoms after his injury; but what was written was that he had no neurological symptoms after injury; his CT was negative. Most likely his MRI showed a disc bulge. The surgery was performed pretty quickly after his injury 10days~.

For everyone that doesn't know much about disc bulges ... They are Common with a capital C. I've seen various numbers listed from 64% of the population to 30%. And many of these being with people that are asymptomatic.

I'm going to use one example; pt comes in with mri confirmed disc bulge at the L5 area, has meeting with spinal surgery scheduled for may 10th; seen pat for less then 2 weeks and getting spinal surgery is the last thing on patients mind atm ... his symptoms are drastically reduced.

My point being did Nick Collins need spinal fusion surgery to correct a disc bulge and was adequate conservative care given to him; less then 10 days for conservative care? (certainly doesnt sound like it ...) - and the symptoms listed in the paper did not describe much; although we were not privey to all his symptoms and findigs.

The question is should Nick Collins have received neck surgery? Was it the right choice for him - financially? health wise? Football wise? spirtial wise?Feel free to look up symptoms of people that have had spinal surgery and their long term issues. And as we can see his football career doesnt look that promising atm.

No I cannot make that decsion for him; but it looks like it was strongly suggested to him to seek surgery and not conservative care; most likely was suggested that the disc bulge could impact him in a severe way even thou it was not doing so atm and that surgery would help prevent this and conservative care wouldn't do much.

Yes Im still mad about what was done to nick collins and I wish he had the opportunity to try something less drastic.

Let Nick Collins surgery be a lesson for you; next time your GP suggests some unnatural approach do your research first.

I read from a few places that the only reason Nick Collins needed the surgery was to have a chance to play in the NFL again. That he could have went without it and lived a 'normal' life.

Financially, I think he could afford it, lol.

I don't think that he personal finances were a determining factor. He was injured on the field during a game. That is work comp. He was not able to return to work but he was on salary so to speak. (He still got paid.) Rehab was also paid for by the comp ins or when he uses the Packers facility.

There have been a few snide remarks cast in the direction on Ted and Mike about them being cold and heartless when it comes to deciding whether or not to let Nick play, one can say the same about Nick. It can be argued he went ahead with a possibly needless surgery at this time because if he waited 20-30 years to have the surgery when he would really need it he would have to pay it out of his own pocket. By that time he would no longer be covered by the Packers work comp policy. The insurance company at that time could say he was fine and re injured it at a later date outside the work environment. He would not be entitled to come in and use the training facilities. If he has a career at that time he would not be paid during his rehab. (Depending of course on his career path.)

When speaking of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy allegedly wanting Nick Collins to retire is all about money ... why is it not mentioned that Nick Collins agent, Alan Herman also said he's urging his client to retire and if he were his son, that would be his recommendation? An agent doesn't make money off retired players.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.